State transportation secretary defends Gov. Patrick's spending plan

State Transportation Secretary Richard Davey defended Gov. Deval Patrick’s transportation plan on Monday during a Business and Economic Advisory Council lunch organized by state Sen. Marc Pacheco, D-Taunton.

State Transportation Secretary Richard Davey defended Gov. Deval Patrick’s transportation plan on Monday during a Business and Economic Advisory Council lunch organized by state Sen. Marc Pacheco, D-Taunton.

“Some have called the Governor’s plan ambitious,” Davey said. “I actually think that’s a sad testament to the commonwealth. It’s not ambitious to spend money on things that we own and we are required to be responsible for today. That’s exactly what this plan does.”

The event took place at the Colosseum Room at the Bella Roma restaurant in Taunton. A packed crowd of local business people and public officials attended the meeting.

Davey said that the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority is the most debt-ridden transit agency in America — with approximately $9 billion in debt — and that Patrick’s transportation bill seeks to address the “shameful” debt.

Massachusetts transportation officials recently backed a $1.8 million budget for the MBTA, with $443 million going to debt payments.

Davey said that Patrick’s $19 billion transportation bill, covering the next 10 years, would allow the state to stop the practice of using credit from bonds to pay for transportation operations.

Davey said that 80 percent of the capital dollars that the bill will raise — using tax increases, such as bringing up the income tax from 5.25 to 6.25 percent, along with gas taxes and other means — will go to roads, bridges and transit systems that already exist. Additionally, the bill calls for projects like the South Coast Rail, which has a price tag of approximately $1.8 billion.

“There are those who say we can’t afford it, that we shouldn’t do it.” Davey said. “It is the administration’s opinion that we can’t afford not to do it.”

Pacheco said there is no question that the state has seen a lack of transportation investments over the last few decades.

“We are not having the type of investment that we should have in infrastructure systems and a lot of those decisions have been made are on debt,” Pacheco said. “Debt is actually paying for salaries, as the secretary mentioned. It shouldn’t be structured that way.”

Pacheco said the question now is how the legislature can get the project funded, with nearly $2 billion in tax increases outlined in the plan. Pacheco said he doesn’t see how the tax increases could get enough support to be passed without alteration.

“My feeling is I really didn’t think that we on the Senate side would ever see the income tax increase make it out of the House in first place,” said Pacheco, who is urging for a broader view of tax increases, such as using carbon taxes. “I feel skeptical that (income tax increases) will even be an option on the Senate side. If that is not an option, you have to take a look at a whole range of other tax options to be able to accomplish at least on the transportation side the amount of money we need to raise to get some of these infrastructure projects done.”